as far back as c. 6000 B.C. Until lately this aboriginal people, which was certainly non-Aryan, was held to be Lappish, but recent investigations seem to show that the Lapps only entered Norway about A.D. 900–1000, and that the original population was probably of Finnish race, though only distantly allied to the Ugro-Finns now inhabiting Finland. To them belong perhaps certain non-Aryan names for natural features of the country, such as Toten, Vefsen, Bukn.
The time of the immigration of a Teutonic element is far from certain. It did not extend N. beyond the Trondhjem district until about the beginning of our era, but there can be little doubt that the immigrants’ advance was extremely slow, and it is suggested, on the evidence of archaeology, that the Teutonic element entered S. Teutonic immigration. Norway towards the end of the (Scandinavian) later Stone age, c. 1700 B.C. (see Scandinavian Civilization). But whatever were the stages of the process, the language of the older race was superseded by Teutonic, and those aborigines who were not incorporated (probably most often as slaves) were driven into the mountains or the islands that fringe the coast. In the highlands the “Finns” maintained some independence down to historical times. The old English poem Beowulf mentions a “Finnaland” which should perhaps be located in S. Norway in about the 6th century, and later on the ancient laws of this region forbid the practice of visiting the “Finns” to obtain knowledge of the future. But only in Finmark, which even in the 13th century stretched far into Sweden and included the Norwegian district of Tromsö, could the earlier inhabitants live their old life, and here they finally fell into the utmost want and misery. Their existence is mentioned as a thing of the past by a North Trondhjem writer in 1689.
The new Teutonic element of population seems to have flowed into Norway from two centres; one western, probably from Jutland, the other eastern, from the W. coast of Sweden. The western stream covered Agder, Rogaland and Hordaland (the modern districts of Christiansand and Söndre Bergenhus), and finally extended N. as far as Söndmöre, while the eastern stream flowed across Romerike and Hadeland through the Dales to the Trondhjem district, where it divided, one stream flowing down the W. coast till it met the western settlements, another penetrating N. into Haalogaland (which included the modern Nordland as well as Helgeland), and a third E. into the N. Swedish districts of Jämtland and Helsingland. The bodies of immigrants were no doubt more or less independent, and each was probably under a king. It is probable that the Horder, who gave their name to Hordaland and Hardanger, were a branch of the Harudes whom Ptolemy in the 2nd century mentions as living in Jutland, where their name remains in the present Hardesyssel. The Ryger, who gave their name to Rogaland, and the modern Ryfylke, are probably akin to the Rugii, an E. Germanic tribe at one time settled in N.E. Pomerania, where we have a reminiscence of their name in Rügenwalde. The first mention of any tribe settled in Norway is by Ptolemy, who speaks of the Chaidenoi or Heiner, inhabiting the W. of his island Scandia. The system of settlement in Norway appears to have been different from that adopted by the same race in other lands. In Denmark, for instance, a group of as many as twenty settlers held land more or less in common, but this system, which demanded that a considerable extent of land should be readily accessible, was not feasible in the greater part of Norway, and except in one or two flatter districts each farm was owned, or at least worked, by a single family.
When history first sheds a faint light over Norway we find each small district or “fylke” (Old Norse fylkir, from folk, army) settled under its own king, and about twenty-nine fylker in the country. At times a king would win an overlordship over the neighbouring tribes, but the character of the country hindered permanent assimilation. Early kingship. The king always possessed a hird, or company of warriors sworn to his service, and indeed royal birth and the possession of such a hird, and not land or subjects, were the essential attributes of a king. There was no law of primogeniture, and on the death of a king some of his heirs would take their share of the patrimony in valuables, gather a hird, and spend their lives in warlike expeditions (see Vikings), while one would settle down and become king of the fylke. There are indications that these conditions were fostered by a matriarchal system, and that it would often occur that a wandering king would marry the daughter of a fylkes-king and become his heir. Probably the king’s power was only absolute over his own hird. He was certainly commander-in-chief and perhaps chief priest of the fylke, but the administrative power was chiefly in the hands of the herser and possibly of an earl. The position of earls is vague, but it is noticeable that both those of whom we hear in Harald Haarfager’s time take the opposite side to their king. The herser (Old Norse hersir), of whom there were several in each fylke, united high birth with wealth and political power, and with the holder, the class of privileged hereditary landowners from which they sprang, formed an aristocracy of which there seems little trace in the other Scandinavian countries at this period. Its rise in Norway is perhaps due to the fact that the nature of the country, as well as the individualistic system of settlement, left more scope for inequalities of wealth than in Denmark or Sweden. Once a family had become wealthy enough to fit out Viking ships, it must have added wealth to wealth, besides enormously raising its prestige. The lands of almost all the most powerful families were on islands, whence it was easy to set forth on roving expeditions. The family property of the earls of Lade, for instance, whose representative in the latter half of the 9th century was the most powerful man of the district, was on the island of Nærö. These islands had been the refuge of the aborigines, and it is possible that, as A. Hansen has suggested, the rise of the aristocracy depends here, as elsewhere, on a subject population. Among the proper names of thralls in a poem in the Elder Edda are several which can only be explained on the hypothesis that they are Finnish, e.g. Klums, Lasmer, Drumba. Harald Haarfager’s decree concerning “those who clear forests and burn salt, fishermen and hunters” probably refers to the Finns as a class apart. There can be no doubt that, in Haalogaland for instance, the aristocracy gained its wealth not only from the tribute extorted from the Finns in Finmark, but also from slave labour.
The eight Trondhjem fylker had a common Thing or assembly very early, but these districts were remote, while the wealthy western districts were too much cut off from each other to unite effectively, though here also a common Thing was early established. The first successful attempt at unification originated round Vestfold, the modern Jarlsberg and Laurvik Amt on the Christiania fjord. Here also there was a certain degree of union very early, and it is possible that national feeling was fostered by proximity to the Danish and Swedish kingdoms. The district was thickly populated, and a centre of commerce. Tradition made the royal family a branch of the great Yngling dynasty of Upsala, which claimed descent from the god Frey. Through several generations this family had extended its kingdom by marriage, conquest and inheritance, and by the end of the reign of Halfdan the Black, it included the greater part of Hamar and Oslo Stift, and the fylke of Sogn, the district round the modern Sognefjord.
Halfdan’s son, Harald Haarfager, having no brothers, succeeded to the whole kingdom, and was further fortunate in that an uncle helped him to maintain his rights. By 866 his power was so well established in S. Norway that he contemplated the conquest of the whole land. The chief obstacle appears to have been the resistance, Harald Haarfager. not only of the petty kings, but also of the aristocratic families, who dreaded the power of a monarchy established by force, and consequently supported the vaguer authority of their own kinglets. There can be no doubt that Harald introduced a feudal view of obligations towards the king, and landowning families, who had regarded their odel, or inherited property, as absolutely their own, resented being forced to pay dues on it. In each district Harald offered the herser the opportunity of becoming his vassals, answerable to him for the government of
